From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Subject: Re: [take23 0/5] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 14:44:52 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611081442420.23154@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
References: <1154985aa0591036@2ka.mipt.ru> <20061107141718.f7414b31.akpm@osdl.org>
 <20061108082147.GA2447@2ka.mipt.ru> <200611081551.14671.dada1@cosmosbay.com>
 <20061108140307.da7d815f.akpm@osdl.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>,
	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>,
	netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Zach Brown <zach.brown@oracle.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Chase Venters <chase.venters@clientec.com>,
	Johann Borck <johann.borck@densedata.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from x35.xmailserver.org ([69.30.125.51]:40933 "EHLO
	x35.xmailserver.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1423843AbWKHWoz (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:44:55 -0500
Received: from alien.or.mcafeemobile.com
	by x35.xmailserver.org with [XMail 1.23 ESMTP Server]
	id <S1FC080> for <netdev@vger.kernel.org> from <davidel@xmailserver.org>;
	Wed, 8 Nov 2006 14:44:53 -0800
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20061108140307.da7d815f.akpm@osdl.org>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Nov 2006 15:51:13 +0100
> Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com> wrote:
> 
> > [PATCH] eventpoll : In case a fault occurs during copy_to_user(), we should 
> > report the count of events that were successfully copied into user space, 
> > instead of EFAULT. That would be consistent with behavior of read/write() 
> > syscalls for example.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > [eventpoll.patch  text/plain (424B)]
> > --- linux/fs/eventpoll.c	2006-11-08 15:37:36.000000000 +0100
> > +++ linux/fs/eventpoll.c	2006-11-08 15:38:31.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -1447,7 +1447,7 @@
> >  				       &events[eventcnt].events) ||
> >  			    __put_user(epi->event.data,
> >  				       &events[eventcnt].data))
> > -				return -EFAULT;
> > +				return eventcnt ? eventcnt : -EFAULT;
> >  			if (epi->event.events & EPOLLONESHOT)
> >  				epi->event.events &= EP_PRIVATE_BITS;
> >  			eventcnt++;
> > 
> 
> Definitely a better interface, but I wonder if it's too late to change it.
> 
> An app which does
> 
> 	if (epoll_wait(...) == -1)
> 		barf(errno);
> 	else
> 		assume_all_events_were_received();
> 
> will now do the wrong thing.
> 
> otoh, such an applciation basically _has_ to use the epoll_wait()
> return value to work out how many events it received, so maybe it's OK...

I don't care about both ways, but sys_poll() does the same thing epoll 
does right now, so I would not change epoll behaviour.



- Davide